TFU for PC?

RC-1162 · 06-04-2007, 03:18 PM

Does anyone feel the game should or will possibly be released on the PC anytime soon? I believe its too good a game for them not to spend the little extra cash into developing a PC version, since a LOT of gamers prefer the PC over consoles. If anybody gets any news about a PC version please post it here.

Why exactly did they not want to develop a PC version up front? Was it anything related to costs? Or something else?

Diego Varen · 06-04-2007, 03:35 PM

While it would be good for PC, I prefer consoles, since there is no worry of crashing, etc. I suppose that Lucas should make it for PC though, since there more money could be made for LucasArts.

Gargoyle King · 06-04-2007, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RC-1162

Does anyone feel the game should or will possibly be released on the PC anytime soon? I believe its too good a game for them not to spend the little extra cash into developing a PC version, since a LOT of gamers prefer the PC over consoles. If anybody gets any news about a PC version please post it here.

Why exactly did they not want to develop a PC version up front? Was it anything related to costs? Or something else?

It probably wouldn't be cost-efficient for LA to do so anyway - people would need a very high-end spec computer to probs even run the game; a high-end spec comp that generally people can't afford or are unwilling to afford.

***stoffe*** · 06-04-2007, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RC-1162

Does anyone feel the game should or will possibly be released on the PC anytime soon? I believe its too good a game for them not to spend the little extra cash into developing a PC version, since a LOT of gamers prefer the PC over consoles. If anybody gets any news about a PC version please post it here.

Why exactly did they not want to develop a PC version up front? Was it anything related to costs? Or something else?

From what I remember one of the developer said that they weren't doing a PC version since the average PC wasn't powerful enough to handle the game. Sounds a bit odd to me since they do a PS2 version which isn't exactly state of the art hardware by now (even though the average PC owner hardly have the monster hardware some of the newer games today tend to require). I don't remember where I read that though, so take it with a grain of salt.

I'd guess it's probably easier and cheaper to develop for consoles as well since you know what hardware the player will have, and console makers often give extensive support to developers working on a product for their platform. Games, especially highly anticipated ones, often tend to sell better for consoles than for PC as well. Perhaps not too surprising since a good gamer PC can be prohibitively expensive in comparison, even though you can use it for much more in addition to playing games.

Kind of ironic in a way that the rapid advances of the PC hardware manufacturers and subsequent high requirements of many PC games are killing the viability of the PC platform as a gaming market.

I hope they eventually reconsider and do a PC version though since STFU looks very interesting from what I've seen so far. It would be a shame to not be able to play it.

RC-1162 · 06-04-2007, 03:56 PM

^
Agreed. Although, having played several games on my friends' PS2 systems, I personally feel a PC game is easier to handle, since there are much more mappable keys. Won't TFU have many different functions, powers, actions, etc? How will they map all that into a single controller?

Jamps · 06-04-2007, 03:56 PM

Gargoyle_King and stoffe are right, there minimum specs required to run the game would be too great for the average PC user. (I remember hearing one of the developers say that.)

Personally, I would love to play it on the PC. I hope they reconsider.

Titanius Anglesmith · 06-04-2007, 04:45 PM

As I've said before, if the PS2, PSP, and DS can handle a less "amped" version of TFU, so can practically any PC. They need to think before they say things about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines, when they can clearly release a less advanced version of it (no DMM or Euphoria or anything else of the sort) for PCs.

Besides, they are completely wrong about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines. Look at games like Crysis and tell me if that looks any worse than TFU.

CLONECOMMANDER501 · 06-04-2007, 05:18 PM

If they think its too powerful why did they bother making Empire At War.

Emperor Devon · 06-04-2007, 07:13 PM

If there will be a PC version we probably won't be hearing about it for a while. Most games are ported to different platforms months or years after release.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CLONECOMMANDER501

If they think its too powerful why did they bother making Empire At War.

EaW's graphics aren't really that spectacular. That and the fact there hadn't been a SW RTS since Battlegrounds gave it a pretty good market.

**Negative Sun** · 06-04-2007, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoffe

From what I remember one of the developer said that they weren't doing a PC version since the average PC wasn't powerful enough to handle the game. Sounds a bit odd to me since they do a PS2 version which isn't exactly state of the art hardware by now (even though the average PC owner hardly have the monster hardware some of the newer games today tend to require). I don't remember where I read that though, so take it with a grain of salt.

Totally agree stoffe...It was posted here btw, so no grains of salt need to be taken

***Jeff*** · 06-04-2007, 08:06 PM

I would like to see a PC version, but I'm almost sure that they have said they will not be developing one as stoffe stated.

**Negative Sun** · 06-04-2007, 08:07 PM

I blame Bill Gates for this!

**Char Ell** · 06-04-2007, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EagerWeasel

As I've said before, if the PS2, PSP, and DS can handle a less "amped" version of TFU, so can practically any PC. They need to think before they say things about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines, when they can clearly release a less advanced version of it (no DMM or Euphoria or anything else of the sort) for PCs.

Yeah, I think they could find a better way to phrase their response to the "Why isn't LA making a PC version of TFU?" question. My question to you though is would you (or any PC gamer) be satisfied with playing a PC version of TFU without DMM or euphoria or with dumbed down versions of those technologies? I'm thinking that is what the PS2 and handheld console versions of TFU are going to get and as for myself I wouldn't be satisfied if a PC version of TFU had inferior graphics to the PS 3 and Xbox 360.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EagerWeasel

Besides, they are completely wrong about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines. Look at games like Crysis and tell me if that looks any worse than TFU.

I think you're comparing two different things here. You'll need a DirectX 10 graphics card to get the full experience out of Crysis. DX 10 cards have been out less than a year. IIRC the Xbox 360 uses a graphics API based on DX 9. Remember the PS 3 and Xbox 360 were designed to support multi-threaded games and can process 6 or more threads at a time. Most PC's out there only support 1 or 2 threads. However without knowing what LucasArts came up with as a minimum spec for a PC version of TFU then I think it's hard to say they've got it completely wrong.

I'm very disappointed LucasArts isn't developing TFU for PC. It sounds like this is going to be a great story that bridges the time between Eps. III and IV. I hope they do end up porting it to PC at some point the road but think this isn't likely as LucasArts hasn't released a game for platforms it wasn't originally announced for in quite some time.

Titanius Anglesmith · 06-04-2007, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cutmeister

My question to you though is would you (or any PC gamer) be satisfied with playing a PC version of TFU without DMM or euphoria or with dumbed down versions of those technologies?

If I knew for a fact that LA would never release a PC version of TFU with all the advanced technologies, I would gladly settle for a dumbed down version. At least I would be able to play the game. Obviously, it wouldn't be nearly as fun, but it should be just as good as the JK series, which I happen to like very much.

It's just not worth the $400-$600 that it takes to buy a next-gen console to have the ability to play one game.

Sabretooth · 06-05-2007, 12:08 AM

I would definitely want it for the PC, being a PC-exclusive gamer myself. But I know that the prospects are ridiculously low.

Thor the Bassis · 06-05-2007, 04:32 AM

LA won't release a dumbed down version - they'd have to re do the whole engine practically and it would definitely detract from the ability to smash everything up and do all the cool things with the environment and force. It also wouldn't be cost effective to re do the engine the worse gameplay in the new engine would mean it wouldn't actually sell as well.

I think the main problem isn't graphics - its processing the effects the force has on the environment which basically means releasing two different games - one with all the sub processes for throwing people through walls and moving the environment around - and one without.

Graphics are too overrated in games nowadays - we all know the best games we end up going back to are good stories and gameplay - thats why classic games stay (x-wing vs tie fighter?).

As for new gen I think with the release of Halo 3 later this year and Force Unleashed next year I might buy in just after Christmas when the price will proberably be lowest and go for an Xbox 360 (better and cheaper).

slornie · 06-05-2007, 06:43 AM

i would like to see it released on PC, maybe they will sometime after the initial release on consoles, give people time to update PCs, when they have got some money in from it to invest in a port

**Negative Sun** · 06-05-2007, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor the Bassis

LA won't release a dumbed down version

They are

It's being developed by someone else though, which is even more confusing cause they might as well ask someone else to do the development for the PC, even if it is Obsidian lol

RC-1162 · 06-05-2007, 10:42 AM

The link doesn't mention anything about a dumbed down version. Am I not looking hard enough?

***Jeff*** · 06-05-2007, 10:46 AM

I'm guessing he means the PS2 and portables version, since theres no way it will be able to function the same as the next-gen console versions.

**Negative Sun** · 06-05-2007, 11:02 AM

^ Yep

It's called reading between the lines (aka common sense)

A PS2 version would be more than doable on any of today's mid to top range PCs...
Why not make it with the ability to turn off certain features even? Like so many other PC games do (KotOR for example, my PC can run it, which is all I need, but I've yet to play it on a system that can run it with every setting maxed out)

Gargoyle King · 06-05-2007, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emperor Devon

EaW's graphics aren't really that spectacular. That and the fact there hadn't been a SW RTS since Battlegrounds gave it a pretty good market.

The only decent RTS game to come out on the SW market, other attempts such as Galactic Battlegrounds & Force Commander were pretty shabby to say the least....

**Jae Onasi** · 06-06-2007, 09:48 AM

If they have to code the game on a computer before they ever create the different platforms, and it works on their own computers, which admittedly probably have high end hardware, I don't understand why they can't use that for a PC version.

RC-1162 · 06-06-2007, 01:16 PM

Is it absolutely necessary for high end graphics? I mean, something on the average level of KotOR or whatever would be totally acceptable by majority of PC gamers, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gargoyle_King

The only decent RTS game to come out on the SW market, other attempts such as Galactic Battlegrounds & Force Commander were pretty shabby to say the least....

While I haven't played EaW, I have played Battlegrounds and loved it. It's not at all shabby, IMO.

Thor the Bassis · 06-07-2007, 08:27 AM

I dont think the graphics are the issue. I agree graphics aren't necessary and if it was simply re doing the graphics I think they'd release it for PC.

Although they are programming the game on computers they are extremely high end computers as all programmers use for new gen - this means its not that it wont work on computers its just there are only a few people in the world who can afford a computer that will run it. The engine has been designed for the processor of Xbox 360 and PS3. No computer owned by a gamer can run as many threads and processes as the new gen consoles and so the computer wouldn't be able to run the basic engine. Its like not being able to do the maths - it doesn't matter what numbers there are if you dont know the method then you can't work it out. It would mean computers catching up with new gen to be able to run it (10 years, 20 years or if your serious invest in a massive computer that has the capability to run all sorts of console disks - basically the computers they're using to program it).

If you think about it to work out the physics of a person flying through the air and crashing through three walls all of which cause the person to spin in a different way and speed then the basics are pretty hard even without the textures.

**Negative Sun** · 06-08-2007, 07:06 PM

Point missed, it's still being done for the PS2, which can be rivaled by any mainstream computer with a decent GPU nowadays...

CLONECOMMANDER501 · 06-08-2007, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emperor Devon

If there will be a PC version we probably won't be hearing about it for a while. Most games are ported to different platforms months or years after release.

EaW's graphics aren't really that spectacular. That and the fact there hadn't been a SW RTS since Battlegrounds gave it a pretty good market.

Ehem

Ctrl Alt Del · 06-08-2007, 09:53 PM

It's fate. Some games are just not worth the trouble of releasing on another console (the PC, that would be). A lot of money is wasted on the conversion, and the developers and distributor even have to pay a tax for it. They don't think that the normal PC player would have that playing style (They think, is it true, I wonder?).

Gargoyle King · 06-10-2007, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctrl_Alt_Del

It's fate. Some games are just not worth the trouble of releasing on another console (the PC, that would be). A lot of money is wasted on the conversion, and the developers and distributor even have to pay a tax for it. They don't think that the normal PC player would have that playing style (They think, is it true, I wonder?).

Yes it's not just graphics that have to be addressed, it's porting for a start which is always an expensive business and porting would require a complete refigurement of the controls to fit the format and parts o the game would have to be redesigned (control tutorials etc). making the initial game project more time-consuming and expensive. I think this is the key reason why LA decided not to release for PC, as they weighed out the pros & cons of doing so and the cons came out on top.

@ all the people who only play PC & Console haters (i play PC & Console); you'll have to get over the fact that TFU is not coming out for PC and probably won't ever come out for the PC so you'll have to deal with it, be stubborn and stick to PC (thus missing out this obvious great gaming opportunity) or you can atleast conform to playing consoles to experience it, it's your choice. At the end of the day you don't own LA and thus LA will do as they see fit with their license, period.

MachineCult · 06-10-2007, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CLONECOMMANDER501

Ehem

You haven't played enough games if you think that those are spectacular graphics.

I'm glad that it isn't coming out on the PC because then I won't be tempted to buy it instead of on the Xbox.

PoiuyWired · 06-12-2007, 05:15 AM

Well) The control refitting would be quite minimal really. Since the Input button is configurable (I sure hope so). And the tutorial... well, its remapping of a few text.

Its like looking into the files of ps2/whatever tutorial on your PC. The files are there, just that they are not shown, with dialogue changes.

As for graphics. Yes I can see the problem here for a bit. Since console for some reason does not usually give you the liberty of changing graphics quality. Well, mostly not, I have seen a few games that is friendly enough allowing turning on/off of cool effects, so I can shut off some of them when I get really tired of it, usually those uber heatwave effects and annoying screen-shakes from fps types.

CraZy_B · 06-16-2007, 12:22 PM

If they wanted PC gamers to buy it they would have to make a lot more settings, like medium and low quality models, textures, effects, terrain etc. to make it more accessible. That takes a lot of time, they almost have to redo the whole game again.
It wouldn't be hard really, just time consuming. They go for the profit$.

I have an Xbox360 and will probably get it for the story but I don't really have high hopes otherwise. No console game has delivered such fun experiences as my PC has so far.

PoiuyWired · 06-17-2007, 02:15 PM

Well, if they release them a year later then most non-gimp computers would be up to par. They just need to set options to allow for even better effects then, no need fo the new downgrade options.

Gargoyle King · 06-17-2007, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraZy_B

No console game has delivered such fun experiences as my PC has so far.

Well perhaps the best games ever crafted are PC games and some of the best console games out there are just ports of their PC counterparts so PC games do definately have a major stance in the game industry (i tend to play both console & PC however, get the best of both worlds

)

PoiuyWired · 06-18-2007, 03:17 PM

Super Smash Brothers, Original Mario Brothers, pong, Bio Hazard, Monster Hunters, KoF/StreetFighter Series, most decent shoot'em'ups etc

What PC Ports?

I mean, Both PC and console have some really darn nice games, in different ways. I would love to see nice PC port of TFU, partly cause I like semi fps control to be Keyboard and Mouse And BECAUSE OF MODS!!!

CraZy_B · 06-22-2007, 07:42 AM

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Star-Wars-Fo.../dp/B000NT752O

What the hell?

**Char Ell** · 06-22-2007, 09:59 AM

Interesting. IMO this is likely a goof by Amazon UK. Notice they still have the game's release date as November 30, 2007. It's been known for at least 3 months that the game was pushed out to Spring 2008. The Force Unleashed for PC sure would be nice to have though...

***Jeff*** · 06-22-2007, 11:47 AM

I agree, its probably a mistake on their part.

RC-1162 · 06-22-2007, 11:59 AM

Why don't someone try ordering it?

Sabretooth · 06-23-2007, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RC-1162

While I haven't played EaW, I have played Battlegrounds and loved it. It's not at all shabby, IMO.

Its shabbiness lies in the fact that it is nothing more than a Star Wars flavoured AoE2 rip-off. I mean, I've never seen a game rip-off another as much as Battlegrounds.